Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 869

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 46 of the 46 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Development and validation of a simple NAFLD clinical scoring system for identifying patients without advanced disease

Harrison, S A, Oliver, D, Arnold, H L, Gogia, S, Neuschwander-Tetri, B A·2008·Gut

Abstract

Background: Clinical predictors of advanced non-alcoholic liver disease (NAFLD) are needed to guide diagnostic evaluation and treatment. Methods: To better understand the demographics of NAFLD and risk factors for advanced disease, this study analysed 827 patients with NAFLD at two geographically separate tertiary medical centres. Results: The cohort was 51% female and had a median body mass index (BMI) of 33 kg/m 2 ; 3% had a normal BMI. Common co-morbidities included hypertension (60%) and diabetes (35%); insulin resistance was present in 91% and advanced fibrosis in 24% of patients. When comparing patients with no fibrosis or mild fibrosis to those with advanced fibrosis, BMI ⩾28 kg/m 2 , age >50 years, and aspartate transaminase/alanine aminotransferase (AST/ALT) ratio ⩾0.8, a quantitative assessment check index (QUICKI) score <0.294 (equivalent to homeostatasis model assessment (HOMA) >6.2) and the presence of diabetes mellitus (DM) were individually associated by univariate analysis with odds ratios (ORs) of ⩾2.4 for advanced fibrosis. Based on the results of forced entry logistic regression analysis, three variables were combined in a weighted sum ( B MI ⩾28 = 1 point, A AR of ⩾0.8 = 2 points, D M = 1 point) to form an easily calculated composite score for predicting advanced fibrosis called the BARD score. A score of 2–4 was associated with an OR for advanced fibrosis of 17 (confidence interval 9.2 to 31.9) and a negative predictive value of 96%. Conclusions: Insulin resistance and its co-morbidities are often present in patients with NAFLD. An easily calculated score based on readily available clinical data can reliably exclude the presence of advanced fibrosis in these patients, particularly among non-diabetics.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/gut.2007.146019

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 46 references

Cited by

See all 869

Metadata

Authors
Harrison, S. A., Oliver, D., Arnold, H. L., Gogia, S., & Neuschwander-Tetri, B. A.
Venue
Gut
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2008-04-04
Volume
57
Issue
10
Pages
1441-1447
ISSN
  • 0017-5749 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-3288
OpenAlex
W2171172585
Cited by
869
References
46
FWCI
19.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Development and validation of a simple NAFLD clinical scoring system for identifying patients without advanced disease. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/gut.2007.146019
The paper
Harrison, S. A., Oliver, D., Arnold, H. L., Gogia, S., & Neuschwander-Tetri, B. A. (2008). Development and validation of a simple NAFLD clinical scoring system for identifying patients without advanced disease. Gut. https://doi.org/10.1136/gut.2007.146019

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.